I’m not surprised that the GOP-led House arrived at the conclusion that the State Department’s poor planning led to the fiasco at the Benghazi, Libya consulate. Well, we kind of knew it all along, since the opening reports of the attack. But, of course, it will be dismissed by most of the media because it is indeed the GOP-led House which conducted the investigation. The Washington Times reports;

The report exonerates the Pentagon itself, saying the military did what it could to respond once the attack began, but “was hindered on account of U.S. military forces not being properly postured” beforehand.

In the most damning finding, House Republicans said Mr. Obama and his team lied about the attacks afterward, first by blaming mob violence spawned by an anti-Muslim video, and then wrongly saying it had misled the public because it was trying to protect an FBI investigation.

“This progress report reveals a fundamental lack of understanding at the highest levels of the State Department as to the dangers presented in Benghazi, Libya, as well as a concerted attempt to insulate the Department of State from blame following the terrorist attacks,” the GOP investigation concluded in its 46-page report.

The Washington Post is too busy blaming Bush for the Boston bomber to bother itself with the findings of the committee and instead just runs an Associated Press article;

Senior State Department officials, including Clinton, approved reductions in security at the facilities in Benghazi, according to the report by GOP members of five House committees. The report cites an April 19, 2012, cable bearing Clinton’s signature acknowledging a March 28, 2012, request from then-U.S. Ambassador to Libya Gene Cretz for more security, yet allowing further reductions. The report does not include actual copies of the cables or other internal correspondence that Republicans cite to support their findings.

“Senior State Department officials knew that the threat environment in Benghazi was high and that the Benghazi compound was vulnerable and unable to withstand an attack, yet the department continued to systematically withdraw security personnel,” the report said.

And, of course, Caitlan Hayden who used to come on this blog to spread her boss’ lies when she worked in the Kabul embassy for Karl Eikenberry That Dick, waves her hand and says;

…the GOP report “appears to raise questions that have already been asked and answered in great detail”….

Yeah, well, Caitlan, the problem is that the Obama Administration wasn’t very forthcoming until after the election. And where are the other witnesses to the raid?

Of course, Democrats on the investigative committees complain that the report is partisan, but then it would be wouldn’t it, since the Democrats won’t investigate their own party in the White House. Kind of like the Washington Post not bothering to write about the report.

The report is “partisan” because the dems weren’t in on it, yet the dems weren’t in on it, because they didn’t want to participate. Nice circular “logic” from the left, yet again.
As Jonn asked, where are the living witnesses?

Some of the living witnesses escaped and are negotiating deals to speak to Congress. One report damns the CIA (color me surprised) for denying a request for support.

The main point in this report is not that it provides some material for political advertisements attacking Hillary, but it undermines Kerry’s ability to financially manage Obama’s foreign policy. Usually Secretaries have some discretionary funds which are used to further their Presidents’ quieter aims. Secretary Kerry will now extra special legal restrictions on how he manages the money.

The sad part being Kerry will break the law, but the law-abiding GS under him will be further constrained in their resources.

I’m still looking for the answer to the question about why the Marines who were in the process of responding from Rota, Spain were told to de-plane and change into civilian clothes. That was an additional delay of an hour and a half. Which incandescently stupid bureaucrat came up with that?

Benghazi is a stain on the hands of the administration that will not wash out. Lady Macbeth had a similar issue and one can only hope that H. “Wideload” Clinton, like Lady Macbeth, is racked by guilt. I know that it is too much to hope that their ends are the same. Beyond Clinton, Benghazi strikes me as a microcosm of the administration. Benghazi smacks of incompetence, lack of foresight, failure to assess a threat fully, paralysis (or worse) in response, followed by deliberate distraction, disinformation, and deceit. To this moment, despite the congressional investigative report, there are individuals remaining in the shadows, nervously confident that the light of truth will not find them. But it will. It is just taking longer than most of us thought it would. The witnesses are yet to be heard from but they’re there. We’ll wait.

Like Hillary said, “what does it matter” (at least to them.)
And, like Congress finding Holder in contempt, nothing will come of it because the lame stream media has designated all things Obama as no fly zone.

“The Obama administration maintains that it has been more than forthcoming on Benghazi and that it is time for the State Department to move on.” Right. And obamaman is a helluva round-ball shooter. So yesterday, the White House calls some NBA “courageous” for telling the world that he’s queer as a three-dollar bill but the victims of the Benghazi terrorsit attack?

Get On Board

Enter your email address below to receive updates each time we publish new content.

Privacy guaranteed. We never share your info.

About thisainthell

We are all military combat veterans and we write primarily from that perspective. Everyone who writes here has a Combat Infantry Badge, a Combat Medic Badge, a Combat Action Badge or a Combat Action Ribbon. We write about issues that matter to combat veterans..read more »